Artifact Arrest

[Snowbear]

I'm for preserving shipwrecks personally. If there are tools or rifles or coins laying around, leave them sit. (Posted by SwimJim)

Got a question.... if the shipreck was a commercial vessel, say from early 1900's and sank when hitting a rock in an area that very few divers will ever go, is subject to the ravages of saltwater corrosion and storm damage, yet has "artifacts" of historical or archeological interest that would be lost as the ship deteriorates while being reclaimed by the ocean, would you still feel this way? How do you propose to "preserve" these wrecks? What is so wrong with taking these "artifacts" after documenting via photos or video where they were found, regardless of what the taker does with them? Why deny everyone the coins and rifles when the ocean is going to reclaim them anyhow?

I agree than wrecks and their artifacts that are more accesible to divers less subject to the ravages of time and nature be left intact as long as possible for all to enjoy, but what about the rest?

 

[SwimJim]

Got a question.... if the shipreck was a commercial vessel, say from early 1900's and sank when hitting a rock in an area that very few divers will ever go, is subject to the ravages of saltwater corrosion and storm damage, yet has "artifacts" of historical or archeological interest that would be lost as the ship deteriorates while being reclaimed by the ocean, would you still feel this way? How do you propose to "preserve" these wrecks? What is so wrong with taking these "artifacts" after documenting via photos or video where they were found, regardless of what the taker does with them? Why deny everyone the coins and rifles when the ocean is going to reclaim them anyhow?

I agree than wrecks and their artifacts that are more accesible to divers less subject to the ravages of time and nature be left intact as long as possible for all to enjoy, but what about the rest?

As I live on a large body of fresh water I guess my opinions are skewed that way. In cold fresh water even wood lasts for hundreds of years. If you expose it to air after its been down for many years it starts to deteriorate like right now. Even metal does this. Automobiles salvaged in the 70's off of car ferrys that sank in the 20's disintigrated almost immeadiatly. Artifacts in the great Lakes are best left in the freezer they sank in. That being said, the ocean is just the opposite. It tends to eat things. I don't think your going to find a 200 year old wooden schooner in the ocean. All your likely to find is a ballast pile. If artifacts aren't brought up they will be gone. At best they will turn into an unidentifiable mass of coral. There for in my opinion this calls for a different set of rules to fit a different circumstance.

jim

 

[Tom Yerian]

Swimjim: go to " heritage health index"

www.heritagepreservation.org/hhi/index.html.... This is an in depth report on the institutions crumbling failure, at protecting our cultural heritage. A diver, picking up an artifact, would do a better job at protecting what he found, then those who spout, ' "we are here to protect you from yourselves" take a look at how they protect our heritage!! To divers who find any artifacts, keep them!! Protect them yourselves, you are intitled to keep what you find, regardless of any unconstitutional law that is passed!!!....Capt. Tom

 

[naskatucket]

were is something preseved better, in the basement of some institution (that addmits failure to maintain) or in the home of a idividual who will treasure the artifact?

 

[LVX]

OK, here is one for you. I was the assistant project director for a shipwreck excavation in Matagoarda Bay off the coast of Texas. This is in saltwater mind you. The ship sank in 1685. That is over 300 years old. We found over 1 million artifacts. That is right 1 million.

This was also an area were very few divers ever went. Who is to say how long things will last underwater whether they be in fresh or salt water.

Archaeologist would love to go pick up everything and then have it all conserved and placed in a museum for everyone to see forever. Now, archaeologist don't have enough money to do this, state and federal governments don't have enough money to do this and the private sector doesn't have enough money to do this. Over time, more are being excavated or at least studied.

I know the argument, if left they will be destroyed. Well, if removed, are they any better off? Only the few who took them will ever know of their existence.

Just my 2 cents

L

 

[LVX]

in the home of a idividual who will treasure the artifact?

And, do these individuals who are picking up these artifacts have the information needed to properly conserve these artifacts? Are you sure? If would be very bad to learn by your mistakes especially if you only have one such artifiact. I have seen it more times than I care to where artifacts were placed on a mantle (sextant) or in the front yard (cannon) and left to rot.

Unless you know what you are doing, these artifacts are a goner.

L

 

[octotat]

And, do these individuals who are picking up these artifacts have the information needed to properly conserve these artifacts? Are you sure? If would be very bad to learn by your mistakes especially if you only have one such artifiact. I have seen it more times than I care to where artifacts were placed on a mantle (sextant) or in the front yard (cannon) and left to rot.

Unless you know what you are doing, these artifacts are a goner.

L

I do agree that if you don't plan or know how to conserve it, leave it be. If you do bring it up, keep it under water until you either find out how, or get someone (museum, university) to properly conserve it. Also, a diver should know if they can bring the artifact up without destroying it. A glass bottle is one thing, a musket with wood stock my break up just from handling if not done properly. I wish certifying agencies had a small section of the open water course to discuss how artifact collection is a complicated subject and to not just randomly pick things up and plunk them on their mantle to fall apart. Also it would be a great time to explaing to new divers that they could be breaking the law, and that the laws vary from state to state, country to country and even many local ordances that they may come across. I'm not suggesting a section on making an entry level diver an archeologist, nor telling them that recovery is a no-no, but just to make them aware of the issues surrounding object recovery.

 

[archman]

I'm more liberal, and do a lot of biological collecting. If it's on public lands and lacking religious/human body parts connotations, I say it should be fair game to the discoverer. Like paleontology, the bulk of archeological finds come from amateur collectors. Archaeologists fully realize this, but don't usually like it. There's an irony in that.

Many marine artifacts are commonly unrecognizable as such, being heavily encrusted. And if they are recognizable, few divers carry marker floats. If you don't retrieve it right then, odds are likely you won't ever.
Professional archaeologists are so incredibly thin on the ground, you may have to wait till kingdom come before one drops by.

 

[ItsBruce]

Here is my two-cents: If the find is something that won't be found again unless it is recovered, it should be recovered. If it is something easily locatable, it should be left. Thus, a wreck whose location is known or otherwise ascertainable should be left alone. A coin one finds in the sand in the middle of the ocean or the muck at the bottom of a big lake or river should be retrieved. Leaving it in place is equivalent to throwing it away. (Just think how much trash is disposed of by being dumped in the ocean.)

 

[naskatucket]

arrogant intellectual archeologists would have things lay on the bottom and rot into oblivion. common sense goes a long way in life. gold and silver are the same in water or out.